I watched a movie on TV in the 70s (I believe it was The Creature from the Black Lagoon) that had about 10 minutes of 3D and I think it was the red/green method you mention here.
LOL. There you go. Spoiler http://blog.reelloop.com/5534/news/sweaty-avatar-sex-scene-cut-pg13-rating-dvd-release/
Apparently, multiple manufacturers are working on 3D TVs that don't require glasses (possibly ready later this year), so we might just skip the entire polarized 3D phase with TV. http://www.markstechnologynews.com/2008/05/phillips-presents-3d-tv-without-glasses.html
It made an estimated $25 mil friday, which is more than it made last week, and almost matched the gross of its first Friday. Amazing.
i was just about to post this. unbelievable. outside shot of having a bigger 3rd weekend than opening weekend. it's sitting at $309M and hasn't fallen off a single bit. at this rate it's on pace to make infinity dollars. you have to think christmas and new year's falling on friday has helped it keep up the pace but if they aren't a huge factor, this thing could fly by Titanic, which basically seemed unreachable up until now, even with inflation helping. even if it started the usual 50% drop off from weekend to weekend right now, it would be looking at $500M, and with the word of mouth on this movie, that seems unlikely. as much as i like cameron, him having the 2 highest grossing movies (by a large margin) of all time doesn't seem right, but he knows how to tap into the movie-going public like nobody else apparently. he made this every bit the event movie he was going for. i really wish the story could have been better or more interesting or a little more action thrown in T2/Aliens style.
I'm not sure money is a fair comparison considering how much they are making on 3D and IMAX prices. I'd love to have seen the numbers that Dark Knight would have made in the same conditions (was DK in as many IMAX theatres). Is there a stat for tickets sold?
They didn't put in the effort in Dark Knight that they did in Avatar.....it was like 7 years in the making.....and tons of special effects and cameras etc. While I loved Dark Knight it is not nearly on the level as an event movie as Avatar is. DD
Why make the distinction? The 3D-ness of the movie is a major part of the attraction and why people want to see it. No need for stats. It's been almost two weeks now: I went to the MarqE tonight at 6:30pm hoping to catch an IMAX 3D showing at 7:30. The 10:00 showing had sold out. Not only that, all the regular 3D showings for the night had sold out, too. I don't think I've ever seen a movie sell out two theatres in the same building for the night by 6:30pm, more than a week after launch. People were leaving the place in droves, disappointed.
Lets not go overboard. TDK is the only thing that comes close in the last 10+ years. There's no telling what it would have made had it come out in this same timeframe.
I don't think TDK is getting the same number of repeat viewings. I know a lot of fan boys saw it a couple times, but I watched it once in the theater and that was enough for me until it came out on video. I've already seen Avatar twice in 3d and I still want to go again when the IMAX 3d slows down a little.
You hit on the key: Avatar is an "event movie", but I don't think the story itself came close to that of the Dark Knight. I saw it last night in all it's glory in Imax. While truly a beautiful film to watch in 3D, I thought the cliched story was a little on the lame side. But am I glad I saw it? Yes.
Almost all movies have cliched plots, they rarely make anything original....so to me, the whole beauty of Pandora was a very nice hook. Hollywood is Sequalwood these days......not much original to look at.... DD
Which is why I can't see how some are comparing it to Star Wars. Granted Star Wars did not have the best dialogue or most original story either, but the characters were awesome and developed perfectly! Skywalker, Solo, Vader, Yoda, Kenobe, 3PO, etc. Hell, even the characters that didn't talk were more interesting and likable in Star Wars. Also, the emperor was menacing in a subtle way compared to that pathetic caricature of a bad guy in Avatar. There wasn't a single character in the movie I really felt connected to. The main character was totally blah. While I agree that the visuals were beyond belief, I felt nowhere near how I felt watching Star Wars simply because I really could care less about most of the characters, and the "bad guys" just seemed too contrived to really be afraid of them. Much more difficult to get into a movie when you don't really feel invested in the characters. Anyway, great movie experience...nowhere near the level of Star Wars.
Really? Star Wars plot was hardly original, and the characters and dialogue fairly wooden and stiff. IIRC Sir Alec Guiness was embarressed by his role as Obi Wan as he thought it was a hacked B movie. Heck Princess Leai drops the english accent about half way through the first one..... I mean I think it compares very well to Star wars. DD
Star Wars has some of the most wooden acting I've ever seen. The dialogue is atrocious and it is redeemed solely by visual effects that are still stunning today. So, so overrated. The first one was ok, and Empire was actually better IMO, though nowhere within miles of one of the all time great movies. The last four killed the franchise.
You didn't read carefully. I agree the story in Star Wars was not original and the dialogue was bad. However, the difference is the characters were actually developed. There was pretty no character development in Avatar, and as a result I really felt nothing for them. Pretty much the opposite of how I felt about the characters in Star Wars.
Ah, true, so you cared about Luke etc.....whereas no one cared about the avatar etc. To me, I cared about the Navi.......it was just a different way to tell a story, where the hero is not the center piece, but the people. DD
I liked the movie but the ripoff of manifest destiny really turned me off as did the idiotic and false representation of Marines.
